Commissioner of Taxation v Grimaldi (No. 9)

The Commissioner of Taxation, acting through the applicant, sought summary judgment against the fourth respondent for the amount of $25,909,612.54. The dispute arose out of outstanding liabilities that had accumulated as a result of various assessments. The application for summary judgment was brought before the Court on 25 November 2009, with an affidavit sworn by Mr Aris Zafiriou, an Acting Director in the Australian Public Service, stating the exact amount owed by the fourth respondent as of 22 November 2009. The only issue to be determined was whether the applicant was entitled to judgment against the fourth respondent given that there was already a judgment against the first respondent for a similar amount.

The court examined whether the applicant's right to claim against the fourth respondent constituted a different right or cause of action from the one adjudicated against the first respondent. It was noted that while the right or cause of action claimed against the first respondent had passed into judgment and thus lost its independent existence, the same could not be said for the claim against the fourth respondent. The court found that the applicant's right against the fourth respondent remained independent and had not been destroyed. While double recovery by the Commissioner would indeed be oppressive, the court found that this was not the case here, as the applicant had not sought to enforce payment of the full amount due under several notices of assessment. Instead, the court concluded that the Commissioner was entitled to secure separate judgments against different taxpayers for the same income, provided that enforcing payment of the full amount under the various judgments would not result in oppressive double recovery.

The Court granted the application for summary judgment. It ordered that judgment be given in favour of the applicant against the fourth respondent for the sum of $25,909,612.54. Additionally, the fourth respondent was directed to pay the applicant’s costs in respect of the specific prayer for relief in the amended notice of motion.